Re: Bits (Nybbles?) from the Vancouver release team meeting

[Sven Luther <sven.luther@wanadoo.fr>]

On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 02:38:01PM +0100, Aurélien Jarno wrote:
> Sven Luther a écrit :
> >  - Not having slower arches hold up testing. 
> Slower arches don't hold up testing. Arches with buildd not well managed do.

Ok, drop this argument, but what do you think of the rest of the proposal ? 

> If you look at the current needs-build graph [1], m68k the slowest arch 
> we support is going pretty well. On the other hand s390 (which is not a 
> slow architectures), have the largest packages waiting to build.
> 
> Another example, I have uploaded lineakd yesterday, it is already built 
> on all arches, except arm and ia64 [2]. In that case, I consider ia64 as 
> a slow arch.

And arm as a badly buildd-maintained one ?  :)

Friendly,

Sven Luther